DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Web Site Suggestions >> Quick and easy comments
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 22 of 22, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 02/17/2005 11:10:04 PM · #1
I had a brain-flash while reading the fixing the voting thread... What if a group of people (or one really dedicated person) developed a system of standardized comments where we could use a number to represent what we are trying to say without having type out the whole thing. This might not have made any sense yet, so pls read on.

For example -
1. Good lighting
2. Good composition
3. Good colors
4. Good contrast
5. Picture too small
6. Boring composition
7. Great tones
8. Boring subject
9. Doesn't stand out

So lets say you wanted to comment on a picture that had good lighting, composition, but a boring subject and didnt stand out and you wanted to convey this to the photographer as feedback for improvement... then you would simply have to type -

[1,2,8,9]

------------
Why I think this is a good idea -
It would give a lot more feedback to the photographer, it would help photographers improve, it would stimulate people to give more comments even if the comments might appear wierd and lifeless they are a form of feedback that would be much valued by the photographer. Plus once a few people start using it, more and more will follow. However there will always be a few people that will avoid it like the plague.

Possible drawbacks -
The numbers and standardized comments will have to be written out, and modified as rarely as possible. They might take a while to get used to and at first it may be faster to type out what you have to say than to look up a number.

But on the flip side once you type [5] (picture too small) for the third time you will remember it easier and easier and soon you will memorize the standardized comments you use often. Plus you dont have to think about offending someone with comments that dont come out right, etc.

What do people think about this idea, and who will be willing to be a part of the group that standardizes the standardized comments?
 02/17/2005 11:11:14 PM · #2
I'd be happy to help out.
 02/18/2005 12:20:26 AM · #3
Nick,

similar ideas have been hammered out in the past. I, for one, am opposed to a simplified standardization of the process for these reasons:

ΓΆ€ΒΆ Photographs, especially good ones, extend beyond a simplified standard. The format of comments should be capable of accommodating their full range, from the obvious to the subtle and from technical properties to the finest nuances of a (potential) visual and/or emotional poetry

ΓΆ€ΒΆ Language, and 'speech' in particular, can articulate facets of life better than a symbolism of numbers and catagories, not to mention the 'humanizing' factor

ΓΆ€ΒΆ We should, I believe, invest an effort in studying photographs, which involves commenting, critiquing or just discussing them. Our efforts should NOT be aimed at conveniencing the voter but on improving the quality of our response to them

I'd rather have one sincere comment then a hundred pickled with 'good', 'nice' and 'boring' adjectives in them. Sincerity don't come cheap.


02/18/2005 12:52:30 AM · #4
Originally posted by zeuszen:

ΓΆ€ΒΆ Photographs, especially good ones, extend beyond a simplified standard. The format of comments should be capable of accommodating their full range, from the obvious to the subtle and from technical properties to the finest nuances of a (potential) visual and/or emotional poetry


This is not meant to replace normal comments but complement them. There will be potentially enough 'standardized comments' to adequately take care of techinacal properties, and approach genuine subtelty as well. Photographs, especially bad ones, dont get enough comments for the photographer to improve upon.

Originally posted by zeuszen:

ΓΆ€ΒΆ Language, and 'speech' in particular, can articulate facets of life better than a symbolism of numbers and catagories, not to mention the 'humanizing' factor


Many voters find it hard to give comments bcos of this humanizing factor. This is one of the reasons the 'hidden during voting' thingy was developed. By removing some of the humanizing elements voters will potentially feel freer to be critical and give more constructive feedback. Once again this does not replace normal comments in any way.

Originally posted by zeuszen:

ΓΆ€ΒΆ We should, I believe, invest an effort in studying photographs, which involves commenting, critiquing or just discussing them. Our efforts should NOT be aimed at conveniencing the voter but on improving the quality of our response to them


On many photos no discussion takes places whatsoever. I do think voters should be convenienced when it comes to giving feedback.

Originally posted by zeuszen:

I'd rather have one sincere comment then a hundred pickled with 'good', 'nice' and 'boring' adjectives in them. Sincerity don't come cheap.


Well if ten people tell you 'too blurry' and 'too much grain' using numbers it would be better than not getting anything back at all imho.
 02/18/2005 01:51:33 PM · #5
bump for day time crowd...
 02/18/2005 01:57:10 PM · #6
I don't like this idea at all.
For me part of the fun is commenting on photos. And when I comment I usualy add my personal feeling to it. Good composition is a nice comment, but does it say what I felt about this photo?
True, when commenting on challenge photos I use my personal feeling less then the usual. But still I don't like the idea of 1,2,6 as a comment. For me this is not a comment. This is a psychometric test.

02/18/2005 03:36:18 PM · #7
Just for the heck of it, suppose the "comment" area for photographs had a set of categories with checkboxes for "poor", "average", "good", and "excellent". These categories might include "composition", "lighting", "color or B/W tonalities", "originality", "Meets Challenge", and "technical (DOF, sharpness, grain etc.)" or some other better-articulated group of categories. One could then during first-pass voting check off these boxes quickly, which would leave a record of how you reacted to the photo as an artefact.

Then on second-pass voting (this is how I work anyway, one could also do it on first pass) we could enter more detailed comments as the spirit moves us. This would make it easier to give at least some viable feedback to every image on which we vote. Yet it would require a certain amount of thought, which might encourage sliughtly deeper study of weaker entries.

Robt.
 02/18/2005 03:45:32 PM · #8
Numbers, no. Checkboxes, maybe. I can see where a few standardized ratings in an area would increase feedback. But I don't think it would be valuable in proportion to the effort required to implement it.

I think the critique points scheme cooked up a while back was one of the better enhancements. A good critique is worth a thousand ratings, and in my mind the better pursuit.
 02/18/2005 03:45:55 PM · #9
This theme has come up in the past and proved just as controversial then.

Personally I think its a good idea because it will increase the amount of feedback given. It will not necessarily enhance it but, it will give feedback to those photos you see which could benefit from such "simplified" notes.

The retention of the free text box will ensure that you still have the opportunity to express your feelings and ideas to the photographer should you wish.

Have a standardised set of responses would mean I for one would be able to give some feedback at least to many more members.

A set of tick boxes would be even better than having to type numbers.
 02/18/2005 04:24:12 PM · #10
Assuming it's a doable enhancement, it would go a long ways towards solving a perennial problem, for sure. Nothing we say or do is going to substantially increase the number of thoughtfully written comments, but the check-box proposal would provide at least some level of feedback to a lot more images, and also serve to help organize peoples' analysis of images as they vote.

Robt.
 02/18/2005 04:30:13 PM · #11
I really dig the checkbox idea.
 02/18/2005 04:43:28 PM · #12
Originally posted by sfboatright:
I really dig the checkbox idea.

Challenges Entered: 194
Avg. Vote Received: 4.627
Good Color: 76
Too Blurry: 51
Too Dark: 84
Highlights Blown: 22
Doesn't meet challenge: 126

If we're gonna keep stats like baseball, will we have to take steroids too?
 02/18/2005 04:51:44 PM · #13
I also like the check boxes idea.
(Make mine out for "cash", please).
 02/18/2005 04:55:44 PM · #14
Originally posted by GeneralE:
If we're gonna keep stats like baseball, will we have to take steroids too?


What steriods.......?

(btw meet bradp in a dark alley at midnight and he will give u that stuff that makes every shot finaminal.....u can't miss a shot with that stuff.......)

i'm not on it right now

note: bradp not affilated in anyway with this post. also copies of the post cannot be made without the express written conscent of Brando Cummings or his lackies.

_Brando_
 02/18/2005 05:00:25 PM · #15
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by sfboatright:
I really dig the checkbox idea.

Challenges Entered: 194
Avg. Vote Received: 4.627
Good Color: 76
Too Blurry: 51
Too Dark: 84
Highlights Blown: 22
Doesn't meet challenge: 126

If we're gonna keep stats like baseball, will we have to take steroids too?


Paul - Not sure if you're applying a little humor or not...I don't think the 'stats' would need to appear at all in a profile page. The 'stats' collected from checkboxes, keyword lists, etc... would just stay with the image as do current comments. Programatically, it would only require a couple of fields be added to the form that is displayed when people vote. I agree with Robert that checkboxes would be preferred and there is room to add on the voting form...

Many times there are only 5 - 8 comments on a challenge image. And then, the comments are usually very vaque or without substance.

Just my 2cents.
 02/18/2005 05:11:40 PM · #16
194 entries, 126 "don't meet challenge", average score 4.627, those other 68 images must've been something special... (wink)

I am an expert on "not meeting the challenge" and it's a sure way to collect 1's and 2's up the kazoo...

Robt.
 02/18/2005 06:17:48 PM · #17
Originally posted by bear_music:
194 entries, 126 "don't meet challenge", average score 4.627, those other 68 images must've been something special... (wink)

I am an expert on "not meeting the challenge" and it's a sure way to collect 1's and 2's up the kazoo...

Robt.

Those are all actually "ballpark figures" based on a good-faith extrapolation of my experience here, as you probably figured : )

I've been doing better at approaching the topic less obliquely ... just check out my entry in the Neon Challenge : )
 02/18/2005 06:24:06 PM · #18
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Paul - Not sure if you're applying a little humor or not...

I am, absolutely!

Although, there are real issues which have to be dealt with -- are those check-boxes monitored statistically, and how will the data be correlated and used are the first two which came to mind.

You might have to have 10-20 "standard" comments with checkboxes -- that's a lot of data to track, despite the apparent simplicity of the data-entry interface.

When you have time (I don't right now), you might want to try searching the forums for some of the many earlier threads which have addressed this issue ... perhaps people can save some typing by re-reading the debate instead of re-writing it. There are many plusses and minuses on each side of the issue ...
 02/18/2005 07:38:05 PM · #19
I wasn't proposing that the checkboxes be used in anyway to create stats, although its an interesting idea.

Just simple as a quick and simple way of generating feedback where there otherwise would be none.

Don't forget I also suggested that the free text box remain as well for those shots that really stir your soul.
 02/18/2005 07:42:17 PM · #20
Actually, I'm the one that suggested the "checkboxes", and no way did I anticipate they'd be worked into the stats. Just a quick, simple way to leave basic feedback while leaving the comments box open for any additional in-depth comments. I suspect a LOT of people don't comment because they feel they don't "write well", and they'd be really happy to see this procedure in place. As long as we have weighted responses to the categories, as the 5-tiered checkboxes would provide, I believe it's useful feedback.

Robt.
 02/18/2005 08:28:57 PM · #21
Actually, I think that a lack of feedback (comments) is a form of feedback in itself. When I have a photo that doesn't get many comments (i.e. most of my photos) I see it as a statement from the voters. They're saying, "Dude, your photo sucks and I don't want to be the one to tell you how bad it sucks, or why. Go study the photos that have done well, compare them to yours, and then try again later."

It may not be the best form of comment, and it certainly isn't specific, but, in a way, it is a comment.

Message edited by author 2005-02-18 20:29:37.
 02/18/2005 10:24:25 PM · #22
Originally posted by Blackdog:
I wasn't proposing that the checkboxes be used in anyway to create stats ...

I know, but I also was "predicting" (with 97% confidence level) that someone would. : )

Checkboxes for comments have been suggested periodically for about the last 2-1/2 years, along with the most amazing variety of voting schemes and comment-encouragement proposals -- some of which have even been tried. That doesn't mean that they are a bad idea, but you should know that the admins have considered the concept previously.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/01/2025 07:47:30 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/01/2025 07:47:30 AM EDT.